From: Elizabeth James <[log in to unmask]>
To: british poets <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 29 October 1998 09:57
Subject: Re: new imprint
|> None of this means anything, you see, unless someone new gets up and
|> running.
|Why, though? Am I the only person who doesn't follow this? Ken Edwards
|and Wendy Mulford have already shown how, by joining forces, they can do
|more
I think there were - at least? - two threads leading here and one was
editorial control. I think I encouraged that one along by saying that we
needed more editors. And that was in response to someone saying their face
didn't fit, or might not fit; I don't know, never saw their face.
My point was that editors *should edit, but we need more editors / outlets.
Collaboration is potential very useful, but it can be counter-productive -
as I found out a few years ago. What am I talking about? Exactly. The system
spent its own energy before much had been achieved.
Proliferation is also very useful. However good KE / RSE is, and that's very
good, we can do with other points of view, other energies. I felt a
knee-jerk reaction to offer my money when this began running; and then I
remembered I don't have any money;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawrence Upton's website: http://members.spree.com/sip/lizard/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"WORD SCORE UTTERANCE CHOREOGRAPHY in verbal and visual poetry"
edited by Bob Cobbing and Lawrence Upton
Writers Forum, London, 1998; 156 pp; ISBN 0 86162 750 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|